Most of us can agree that education is one of the most important services provided by our government and that we all want America’s education system to be the best in the world. That is why in 2004 we spent $536 billion on it, which is $82 billion more than we spent on the war in Iraq and the rest of our military. So why, when we spend so much money, do we rank eighth in the world in educating 10-year-olds and twenty-fifth in educating 15-year-olds?

Perhaps the real problem is not money, but instead the system we have set up. There are a lot of really good ideas being proposed all over our country, but without the support of voters, the lobbying arm of the teachers’ unions will fight to keep their status quo system. Those of us who attend an educational institution like Gustavus can appreciate the monumental importance of learning, so we should be able to see the need for new ideas that encourage progress instead of infusing old failed ideas with more money.

One of the biggest myths in education is that the secret to improving education is increasing spending. We currently spend about $10,000 per student per year, according to ABC News investigative reporter John Stossel. That means that a class of 25 has $250,000 for operating expenses alone. Capital expenses such as buildings use separate funds. Don’t you think a few good teachers could educate students for that amount of money? When you take away competition and instead use a government monopoly, money is wasted terribly and students are the ones who suffer.

One example of the fallacy of more money creating better schools took place in Kansas City, Missouri. Bureaucrats blamed a lack of funding as the reason for failing test scores. Billions of dollars were infused into the local schools beginning in 1985, and the latest and greatest facilities and equipment were installed. They even paid for taxis to bring more white kids into the predominantly black schools. All of this increased funding should have resulted in test score improvements, right? Wrong. In 1999, after spending $2 billion, the district failed eleven performance standards and lost its accreditation for the first time in the district’s history.

My mother is a public high school English teacher, and as much as I would like for her to make more money, teachers do not have it as bad in America as many of them would like to make you think. Their nine-month job, which includes great insurance and a strong pension plan, pays them an average of $30.91 per hour (based on the national average of $45,081 per year). That’s more than chemists ($30.64 per hour), computer programmers ($28.98 per hour), registered nurses ($26.87 per hour) and psychologists ($28.49 per hour), according to the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics. Economic logic would suggest that if teachers were grossly underpaid, there would be a shortage of teachers to hire, but in most areas the opposite is true. One report presented by Michael Podgursky during a conference at Harvard University showed that for every open teaching job in Missouri there are 25 applicants.

The problem for me isn’t that teachers are paid too much, but rather that bad teachers are paid too much. There is no system to reward good teachers with more money and pay bad teachers less. The teachers unions are so strong that they squash any attempts to increase competition because it threatens their power.

Another step I would take to improve our school system is to create a voucher system that allows students to take their money to wherever they and their parents believe will give them the best education. The current $10,000 per student would be nice, but a voucher of $5,000 would cover tuition at most Catholic schools.

Critics say that vouchers burden public schools with “problem” kids whose parents are less involved, but research by a Harvard economist says otherwise. When Milwaukee implemented a voucher system, Harvard economist Caroline Hoxby, found that both kids who used vouchers to attend private schools and kids in competing nearby public schools improved their test scores. The added competition forced both types of schools to be better, and students on all sides reaped the benefits. Test results in those public schools went up by 8.1 percent in math, 13.8 percent in science, and 8.0 percent in language. Wouldn’t you like to see your test scores make a jump like that?

America seems desperate for positive changes in our government system right now, and I can’t think of an area of our society in more need of progress than education. Powerful teachers’ unions such as the MEA and NEA make it difficult to change our current system by encouraging the status quo. They look out for teachers, but who is looking out for the best interests of students? Cutting spending isn’t the answer, and increasing spending isn’t the answer, but changing a system of rigid government monopoly into one that rewards innovation and creativity through added competition is the best path I see for progress.